|
||||||||||
Author: 1957chev
BettWildlife Massacred in the Name of Faux-Green Energy!
DISEASE and heedless management ofwind turbines are killing North America’s bats, with potentially devastating consequences for agriculture and human health.
We have yet to find a cure for the disease known as white-nose syndrome, which has decimated populations of hibernating, cave-dwelling bats in the Northeast. But we can reduce the turbine threat significantly without dismantling them or shutting them down.
White-nose syndrome (also known as W.N.S.) was first documented in February 2006 in upstate New York, where it may have been carried from Europe to a bat cave on an explorer’s hiking boot. In Europe, bats appear to be immune, likely the outcome of a long evolutionary process. But in North America, bats are highly susceptible to the cold-loving fungus that appears in winter on the muzzle and other body parts during hibernation, irritating them awake at a time when there is no food. They end up burning precious stores of energy and starve to death.
The consequences have been catastrophic. A 2011 study of 42 sites across five Eastern states found that after 2006 the populations of tri-colored and Indiana bats declined by more than 70 percent, and little brown bats by more than 90 percent. The population of the northern long-eared bat, once common, has declined by an estimated 99 percent and prompted a proposal from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to list it as an endangered species. Other species of hibernating cave-dwelling bats have declined precipitously as well.
Whether these bats will recover or go extinct is unclear. Meanwhile, W.N.S. continues to spread rapidly. On the back of this year’s extremely cold winter, it moved into Michigan and Wisconsin. It is now confirmed in 23 states and five Canadian provinces.
Tree-dwelling bats don’t seem to be affected by W.N.S., since they don’t hibernate in caves. But wind farms are killing them.
Wind turbines nationwide are estimated to kill between 600,000 and 900,000 bats a year, according to a recent study in the journal BioScience. About half of those lost to turbines are hoary bats, which migrate long distances seasonally throughout North America. Eastern red and silver-haired bats, commonly seen in Central Park in New York City hunting insects at night, are also being killed by turbines by the tens of thousands.
We can’t afford to lose these creatures. In the Northeast, all of our native bat species eat insects. One little brown bat can eat 1,000 mosquitoes in an hour, reducing the potential for mosquito-borne diseases. A colony of 150 big brown bats can protect crops from up to 33 million rootworms over a growing season. The Mexican free-tailed bats of Bracken Cave in south-central Texas consume about 250 tons of insects every summer night. The natural pest control provided by that species across eight Texas counties has been valued at nearly $750,000 as it protects the $6 million summer cotton crop. Nationwide, the value of bats as pest controllers is estimated to be at least $3.7 billion and possibly much more. (This leaves out the value of two other very important services that bats provide: controlling insect-borne diseases and pollinating commercially valuable plants.)
Today, genetic engineering may seem to provide an effective way to protect crops from insects, but pests have already developed resistance to some of these products. Insects also readily evolve resistance to chemical insecticides, and increased use of these chemicals would come at a great cost to human health. But bats have shared the night skies with insects for at least 50 million years, and they know how to hunt and eat them.
Fortunately, we can reduce the mortality caused by wind farms, which are often located on windy routes favored by some migratory bats. Wind turbines usually switch on automatically at wind speeds of about 8 to 9 miles per hour, speeds at which insects and bats are active. But if, during times of peak bat activity, energy companies recalibrated their turbines to start at a wind speed of about 11 miles per hour, which is too windy for insects and bats to fly, turbine-related deaths could be reduced by 44 to 93 percent, according to a 2010 study published in the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. The effect on power output would be negligible — less than 1 percent annually.
Threats to bats also threaten us. We should step up research on the prevention and cure of white-nose syndrome. And we should require energy companies to take steps to protect bats from collisions with wind turbines. It is foolish to spend enormous sums to create pesticides and transgenic crops to fight insects, while investing little to protect bats, our most efficient insect fighters.
Government has NO Business Funding Useless Wind Turbines!
May 11. 2014
George Fenwick: Taxpayers should
not be forced to subsidize bird-killing
wind turbines
SINCE EARLY in our nation’s founding, we have placed a high value on conserving native wildlife so that future generations will be able to experience and benefit from wild species as we do today. Yet even as our federal government has ’sequestered’ federal funds and been forced to shutter national parks during contentious government shutdowns, we taxpayers have been regularly tapped, year after year, by large corporate wind companies to provide them with tax credits they demand in order to make a profit of their ventures.
Taxpayers may not be aware that they have funded for several years — through the federal government’s Production Tax Credit (PTC) — a public subsidy that can create a perverse incentive to put wind turbines in areas that produce little electricity but would have a devastating impact on migratory birds.
As presently configured, the PTC provides 2.3 cents per kilowatt generated, largely to wind energy companies. Poorly sited wind energy development kills significant numbers of birds and bats and alters sensitive wildlife habitat. At the current estimated mortality rate, the wind industry is killing hundreds of thousands of birds and bats per year and is expected to kill well over one million per year as projects are built to reach the federal goal of 20 percent renewable energy by 2030.
While these numbers represent a relatively small percentage of the total number of birds and bats estimated to reside in or breed in North America, many of the species being killed are already declining for other reasons, and this mortality can exacerbate these declines. In fact, the North American Breeding Bird Survey shows that between 1966 and 2010, 40 percent of neotropical migratory birds (55 of 137 species assessed) had significant negative population trends. The mortality due to wind turbines is just one more factor contributing to the cumulative impact of humans on wild bird and bat populations.
In addition, many species are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Killing them is a violation of federal law punishable by significant fines.
We all want clean, renewable energy, but wind power cannot be considered “green” if it is unnecessarily killing large numbers of birds and bats. However, we truly can have it both ways. Making wind power a win-win proposition for conservation-minded taxpayers is not overly complicated. Two key actions need to be taken.
The first is that “no-go” zones need to be established for the industry in the most sensitive locations where the toll on birds simply outweighs the benefits of wind development. American Bird Conservancy has already developed maps showing those areas.
The second is that the voluntary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) permitting guidelines, by which the wind industry is currently guided, need to be made mandatory. Since the Energy Policy Act of 1992 established the PTC, the federal government has doled out billions of dollars and hoped that the for-profit wind industry would voluntarily do the right things to minimize impacts to birds and bats.
In addition to their inherent beauty and cultural and scientific importance, birds and bats also have an incalculable value by maintaining the ecosystems on which humans depend. For example, birds and bats eat billions of insects each year that left unchecked could decimate our crops, damage our forests, or lead to more use of troubling pesticides. Bats are equally valuable. In one eight-county region of Texas, Brazilian free-tailed bats saved local farmers an estimated $740,000 annually in crop damage and pesticide costs by feeding on corn earworm and cotton bollworm.
Unfortunately, in the case of wind energy, rapid development has gotten way out ahead of the science and regulatory framework. Setting reasonable regulatory sideboards for the industry and putting key, sensitive areas off limits are two principles that should be non-negotiable as renewal of the PTC is considered. It harkens back to an old standard in business dealings to which most of us have grown accustomed. It is called quid pro quo.
George Fenwick is president of the American Bird Conservancy in Washington, D.C.
Destroyed Roads…..one of many problems with Wind Turbines
Where will wind companies get the money to pay for roads?
I read the article in last week’s Sachem concerning the roadwork that will be required once the wind turbine companies are finished.
First of all, isn’t it nice that our county has waived the half load restrictions for these guys, once again displaying their eagerness to bend over backwards for anything related to the folly known as the Green Energy Act?
Secondly, it seems that the wind turbine companies themselves will be on the hook for the costs of the repairs.
Whew… that’s a relief. But where will they get the money? From the Ontario government, of course. And the Ontario government will get it from us. Samsung, in particular, loves to spend our tax dollars. I’m sure we paid the tab when Samsung took Mayor Hewitt on that little golf outing a couple of years back. We can only hope he golfs better than he governs.
Brad Smith,
Dunnville
Kathleen Wynne is destroying our Province. Time Hudak will turn things around!
Kathleen Wynne says Tim Hudak will
plunge Ontario into recession as
PCs take aim at Liberals’ ‘bloated’ energy bureaucracy
Keith Leslie, Canadian Press | May 12, 2014 | Last Updated: May 12 2:11 PM ET
More from Canadian Press
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Nathan DenetteOntario PC Leader Tim Hudak, left, walks in with employees before he makes an announcement at a packaging plant about creating 40,000 jobs in Ontario with affordable energy during a campaign stop in Smithville, Ont., on Monday, May 12, 20
TORONTO — Ontario’s opposition parties started the second week of the campaign for the June 12 election Monday by focusing on soaring electricity bills, which they blamed on the Liberal government’s green energy policies.
Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak said he’d end generous subsidies for wind and solar power, cut the “bloated” bureaucracy at Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation to help get electricity rates low enough to generate 40,000 new jobs.
“We need to pare down that massive hydro bureaucracy,” Hudak said at a factory in Smithville, in the Niagara Peninsula.
“They have 11,000 people in the hydro bureaucracy making $100,000 a year, can you believe that?”
After announcing plans last Friday to trim 100,000 public sector jobs, Hudak also said he would reduce the number of provincial electricity agencies created after the breakup of the old Ontario Hydro.
Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne says Hudak’s plan for the province would plunge Ontario back into a recession.
Wynne says Hudak’s “reckless” election campaign pledge to shrink the public sector by 100,000 jobs would “sacrifice our fragile economic recovery.”
Speaking at the Carpenters’ Union local 27 training centre in Vaughan, Wynne said Hudak would fire many of the people who hire skilled tradespeople for home renovations.
“We believe this is exactly the wrong way to go,” she said.
“His approach would sacrifice our fragile economic recovery and would plunge us back toward recession. That may be his approach but it’s not mine and it is not ours.”
Wynne says when people can’t afford to build or renovate their homes, highly skilled apprentices would have trouble finding work.
She says a Liberal government would safeguard those jobs by investing $130 billion over a decade in infrastructure projects across the province.
Hudak has said that if his party wins the June 12 provincial election, he wants to shrink the public sector to increase efficiencies and spur job creation in the private sector.
“Unlike Tim Hudak, we believe that jobs are more important than cuts,” Wynne said. “Tim Hudak is proposing a reckless and really devastating cut that would take 100,000 jobs and would replace those with pink slips. He’s making a pink-slip pledge.”
Campaigning in Thunder Bay, Ont., New Democrat Leader Andrea Horwath promised to scrap the provincial portion of HST on hydro bills if she becomes premier, which she said would save homeowners about $120 a year.
“Instead of making life affordable, the Liberals decided to add an unfair tax on top of the highest electricity rates in the country,” said Horwath. “We’re going to take it off and make life affordable for families.”
Premier Kathleen Wynne spent the first part of her day on the radio, defending the Liberals’ decisions to cancel two gas plants in Oakville and Mississauga, which could cost taxpayers up to $1.1 billion.
They have 11,000 people in the hydro bureaucracy making $100,000 a year, can you believe that?
Wynne said former premier Dalton McGuinty did “what he believed was right,” but added that she has tried to rectify mistakes that she believes were made.
Campaigning later in Vaughan, north of Toronto, Wynne said hydro rates went up in large part because the government had to make massive investments to repair and upgrade Ontario’s electricity system after years of neglect.
“There’s a cost associated with that, and so we are working to make sure that there are programs and supports in place for people who are struggling to pay for their electricity,” she said. “But are we going to back away from clean, renewable energy? No, we’re not going to do that.”
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darren CalabreseOntario Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne speaks in front of carpenter apprentices and other Liberal candidates during a campaign stop at the Carpenters’ Union Local 27 Training Centre in Vaughan, Ont. on Monday, May 12, 2014.
Hudak lashed out at both the Liberals and the NDP for rising electricity bills.
“A billion dollars in the gas plants scandal to save a couple Liberal seats and you folks got stuck with the bill,” he said.
“And the NDP, they’re really just the great pretenders. They say they care about hydro rates but they voted with the Liberals each and every time.”
Wynne went on the attack against Hudak’s plan to wipe out tens of thousands of public sector jobs in an effort to eliminate the $12.5-billion deficit in just two years.
“We have a plan to cut ribbons at construction sites. Tim Hudak’s plan is to cut jobs at construction sites,” she said.
“Our steady balanced approach would invest in transit, invest in infrastructure, and it invests in skills training to help the people of Ontario get good jobs.”
Hudak said he’s giving people the “hard talk and the plain truth,” while the Liberals and NDP are making promises Ontario can’t afford.
“If this were a popularity contest, you’d promise everything under the sun to all people,” he said. “I’m actually proposing some pretty tough choices, but I think we owe it to Ontarians to be honest with them about the mess that we’re in.”
— With files from Maria Babbage, Diana Mehta and Colin Perkel
Conservatives are our only chance to save province! Lib/NDP promise more of same!
Ontario’s future in hands of voters
QUEEN’S PARK
Credits: FILE PHOTO/Dave ThomasToronto Sun/QMI Agency
Ontario is great. Without Ontario we wouldn’t have the Great Lakes, Bobby Orr or that secret club in Toronto’s Rosedale where the chattering class gathers to decide our future, and to chatter. It’s also Canada’s once and, we hope, future economic growth engine.We need to keep this in mind now that Ontario is in an election, and as the party leaders tour the province in hope of winning the support of unsuspecting voters. They will do this by kissing babies and shaking hands (confusing the two is a definite no-no).The leaders will say optimistic things, criticize their opponents and, we hope, propose fresh ideas. The fresh ideas part is the part that moves the province forward. So far, so good.
But not all ideas are equal. They should fit the times, and address the biggest problems. It is also not a good thing if the proposed ideas make the existing problems even worse. In some cases those new ideas might one day become the biggest problem. This is where the toothy Kathleen Wynne should walk on the stage, smiling, though I’m not sure why she’s smiling.
Ontario’s economy has struggled for years. Sure, as the U.S. economy eventually recovers, Ontario will get towed along behind it, but waiting for another economy to emerge from recession is not a strategy; it’s the lack of a strategy.
So instead of bringing forward new ideas on the economy, the Liberals have essentially declared that it’s not the economy stupid, it’s — get ready for it — retirement income.
Unfortunately, Wynne’s Ontario Retirement Pension Plan idea would actually hold back the kind of recovery that could one day make her pension plan idea more feasible. Oh, the delicious and fattening irony.
That said, the Liberals have not even established that Ontarians require more retirement income. They certainly haven’t made the case that it’s a higher priority than creating jobs, resource development in the Ring of Fire, a sensible energy policy that allows manufacturing to compete, or half a dozen other pressing needs. She is fleeing from those issues, because if she is forced to speak to them she’ll have to acknowledge that her government after a decade in power has not made the progress that it should have made. Their handling of the energy file alone should be a firing offence.
PC Leader Tim Hudak has not set Ontario aflame with his fiery rhetoric or his charisma. Instead he has stayed relevant by hanging in there and not doing anything stupid. Most importantly, his instincts are right. He has set his sights clearly on working-class Ontario with his Million Jobs Plan. He understands that your employer can’t pay into your pension plan if you don’t have an employer because you don’t have a job. That might seem obvious, but not obvious enough that the other two leaders have acted accordingly. Still Hudak must add details to his plan and be credible in selling it.
This is far from a slam dunk for Hudak. Kathleen Wynne remains personally popular. Almost everything hinges on the vagaries of the campaign and whether Ontarians have had enough to want change.
Help PEFCN and APPEC fight the Wind Turbines! Here’s how!
Big Yard Sale on May 24 to benefit PECFN and APPEC legal funds — Donate items / Find treasures
YARD SALE
SATURDAY MAY 24, 2014
(rain date May 25)
9 am to 4 pm
14011 HIGHWAY # 33
FUNDRAISER FOR PECFN AND APPEC
Spring cleaning?
Why not put aside those unwanted items that someone else may be able to use and support the legal funds to stop wind turbines in the County.
Large donations can be dropped off at 7 am the day of the sale at the big barn, 14011 Highway #33, near corner of County Rd 32.
Alternatively, pick up of larger saleable items (no junk or bedding please) can be arranged by emailing contactus@appec.ca . Include your name, address, phone number and brief description of item(s).
Small items can dropped off at Royal LePage, 104 Main Street Picton from Wednesday May 21 to Friday May 23.
Donate and/or come out to the Yard Sale on May 24 and find a treasure.
Tickets for the South Marysburgh Heritage House and Winery Tour will be available to purchase at the Yard Sale.
Government Corruption at every level….even in the Toronto School Board!
TDSB chair funnelled school funds to his charity: probe
The chairman of Canada’s largest school board directed tens of thousands of dollars intended for a Toronto elementary school to his own charity, according to confidential internal reviews of spending during his tenure as principal.
The spending reviews, obtained by The Globe and Mail, are part of a series of internal investigations spanning four years that raise questions about Chris Bolton’s dual roles at a school and a charity before he was elected a trustee of the Toronto District School Board, and conducted by the organization he now chairs. Nearly a decade later, the board continues to grapple with governance concerns arising from Mr. Bolton’s ties to this charity, which is now run by his live-in partner.
None of the reports have been made public and some of them are labelled as drafts. However, their findings are summarized in a 2005 letter, addressed to Mr. Bolton and marked final, that accuses him of a breach of fiduciary duty and lays out a series of allegations that include “misappropriations of funds” and a lack of transparency. No action has been taken by the board.
Mr. Bolton defended his time as principal at Ryerson Community School, saying the school received donations in recognition of its track record for helping students, many of whom came from low-income families. “The money was used for good works in an inner-city community,” he told The Globe.
According to the letter, Mr. Bolton directed to his charity a $50,000 grant that Ryerson received from the Atkinson Foundation. The non-profit foundation, created by former Toronto Star publisher Joseph E. Atkinson, stipulated that the money was to be used exclusively for the benefit of the school. According to the letter, almost half went to non-Ryerson recipients.
According to the letter, Mr. Bolton also directed to his charity $10,000 from actor Denzel Washington, who made the donation to Ryerson after using school property during the filming of John Q. The money was used to create a bursary for students at Ryerson, but was controlled by Mr. Bolton’s charity.
A $5,000 donation to Ryerson from a group called the Unum Foundation was also directed to the charity, according to the letter.
In the letter to Mr. Bolton, dated Feb. 25, 2005, he is asked to repay “unauthorized commissions” totalling $3,250 – consisting of a 5-per-cent fee paid to his charity, Friends of Community Schools, for managing the donations.
According to another report, Mr. Bolton also used his charity to purchase a bus, dubbed “White Lightning,” which once got stuck on a highway while on a field trip.
The investigations date back to 2001, when Mr. Bolton was principal of Ryerson Community School, an elementary school in downtown Toronto. He also ran a charitable organization he founded – described in one document as Mr. Bolton’s “alter ego” – and diverted donations for Ryerson to his charity, one report says, allowing him to disperse the funds without scrutiny from the school board.
The Globe has pieced together this chapter of Mr. Bolton’s three-decade career as a teacher and principal, based on documents and interviews with more than a dozen sources familiar with the situation. One report, prepared in 2005 by lawyers at Keel Cottrelle at the request of senior staff at the TDSB, follows an internal school-board report four years earlier, also obtained by The Globe.
The report accuses Mr. Bolton of putting his own interests ahead of the school’s. “Suspected transgressions,” it says, involved “the misuse and possible misappropriation of school board funds and property.”
In response to The Globe, Mr. Bolton said he does not recall receiving the letter from Keel Cottrelle that gave him 60 days to remit all funds “retained and misapplied” by his charity.
It is not clear how the matter was resolved. The Atkinson Foundation did not receive a formal report after it requested details of how the award was used, executive director Colette Murphy told The Globe. The foundation gave the award to Friends of Community Schools, she said, because money typically goes to registered charities. The foundation was aware that Mr. Bolton controlled the charity, Ms. Murphy said.
Several trustees told The Globe they never saw the reports on Mr. Bolton. Sheila Ward, a TDSB trustee and chair at the time, said she did not share the Keel Cottrelle report because there was no proof of any wrongdoing: “The Atkinson grant had nothing to do with us,” she said. “The TDSB had no jurisdiction over it.”
Since Mr. Bolton was elected a trustee in 2003, he has risen through the political ranks, becoming vice-chair in December, 2008, and chair two years later.
During his time as a trustee, his involvement with his charity has remained controversial. Friends of Community Schools received $56,000 in provincial funding dispersed by the TDSB to run a summer camp for 225 children at Ryerson in the summer of 2009. The Globe has reported that Mr. Bolton did not declare his potential conflict of interest and the board has since passed a motion calling for stricter governance rules.
The TDSB began investigating Mr. Bolton in January, 2001, just days before he retired from Ryerson. Mr. Bolton blamed Georgina Balascas, a superintendent at the time, for “instigating” the review.
Ms. Balascas told The Globe: “I just wanted to get answers and clarification around some of the issues that had come to my attention.”
One of the issues was the big white school bus. Not only had Mr. Bolton purchased it without getting approval from the TDSB, she said, it was a violation of the board’s rules for a school to own a bus.
The Keel Cottrelle report says it was the understanding of a former Ryerson secretary that Mr. Bolton bought the bus through his charity to avoid insuring it through the TDSB.
Mr. Bolton said no money changed hands. A transit company in Muskoka gave him the bus in exchange for a tax credit, he told The Globe. Mr. Bolton charged teachers a lower rate than what they paid to use the TDSB’s buses, the report says. Teachers refused to use the bus after it got stuck on a highway during a field trip, according to the report.
The internal TDSB review also examined the relationship between Ryerson and Mr. Bolton’s charity but was unable to account for funding from donations.
Mr. Bolton also said he was not obligated to provide the TDSB with an accounting of the Atkinson money, because his charity received the funds on behalf of Ryerson.
The Atkinson grant was by far the single largest donation to Ryerson. The school received the Ruth Atkinson Hindmarsh Award in October, 1999 in recognition of its highly innovative and effective work with children. At a standing-room only ceremony in the school’s gymnasium, Mr. Bolton was on the stage with Terry Ross, his live-in partner. Much to the surprise of some in the audience, Mr. Ross, treasurer of the charity at the time, accepted the Atkinson cheque.
The TDSB report says the school board could not determine how proceeds of $1,500 from the sale of the bus were recorded. Mr. Bolton denied that he sold the bus, saying he drove it to a wrecker in Toronto and handed him the keys. Ryerson staff gave Mr. Bolton a caricature of him with the bus, which is hanging in his TDSB office.
Where donations for Ryerson school went
THE MONEY
While Mr. Bolton was principal of Ryerson Community School, his charity received the following donations that were intended for use by the school, according to documents obtained by The Globe:
- $50,000 grant from the Atkinson Foundation
- $10,000 bursary donated by Denzel Washington
- $5,000 grant from the Unum Foundation
THE CHARITY
Instead of having these funds go directly to the TDSB or Ryerson, they were directed to Mr. Bolton’s charity, Friends of Community Schools, which handled the money.
The charity used $20,500 of the Atkinson grant to fund other community organizations instead of Ryerson, which was the intended recipient of the grant, according to documents.
THE FEE
Mr. Bolton’s charity deducted a 5-per-cent administrative fee from the donations, according to the report. The report says these costs would not have been charged and more money would have been available to Ryerson if the funds had initially gone to the TDSB. The TDSB became a registered charity in January, 1998.
THE BUS
Mr. Bolton used his charity to procure a bus, which was then used by teachers at a fee lower than what TDSB would charge. The bus, which had mechanical problems, was owned by 1247550 Ontario Limited, which was controlled by Mr. Bolton.
The Wind Industry is on Financial Life Support – PULL THE PLUG!
Australian Wind Industry’s House of Cards Collapsing
May 12, 2014 by
With Australia’s wind industry in its death throes, STT has already given fair warning to bankers, investors and shareholders with so much as a cent in wind power companies to grab their cash and get out as fast they can (see our post here).
All-wind-power-outfits – like our favourite whipping boys, Infigen – are losing money hand over fist – and have little more to do than to watch their share prices plummet and await a knock on the door from a receiver or liquidator.
As is often the way, financial troubles spread like a contagious disease – the latest to catch the “bug” is Hydro Tasmania.
STT followers will remember Hydro Tasmania as the bunch of liars and thugs that have ridden roughshod over King Island in an effort to spear 250 giant fans all over the jewel of Bass Strait.
In the first round, Hydro Tasmania promised King Island locals that unless 60% supported their planned project, they would simply abandon it – by dropping their planned “feasibility study” (see our posts here andhere). Hydro Tasmania then set about buying the votes it needed to show 60% supporting its project (see our post here).
Those shovelling Hydro Tasmania’s cash out to bribe the locals must have flunked basic arithmetic, because they only managed to muster 58.7% of the vote. But, never mind, Hydro Tasmania simply ignored its earlier promise and launched into its feasibility study, anyway (see our post here). So much for keeping promises.
But, as they say: “what goes around, comes around”.
Hydro Tasmania is losing 10s of $millions on their existing Tasmanian wind farm operations – Musselroe and Woolnorth – and look set to lose 100s of $millions more. And, in the irony of ironies, it’s blaming the Federal Government’s RET Review and the threat that the Government will breach its “promise” to retain the mandatory Renewable Energy Target.
Here’s The Australian on Hydro Tasmania’s date with bad Karma.
Green energy firm Hydro Tasmania faces $20m loss
The Australian
Matthew Denholm
10 May 2014
AUSTRALIA’S largest renewable energy producer, Hydro Tasmania, faces projected losses of up to $20 million a year on wind power deals and blames uncertainty surrounding the Renewable Energy Target.
The state-owned company also revealed it had suspended major spending on $3.6 billion in new wind projects in Australia while the target of 20 per cent by 2020 is reviewed by the Abbott government. Hydro Tasmania chief executive Stephen Davy said significant cuts to the RET could see existing wind farms prematurely abandoned and trigger demands for taxpayer compensation.
A planning document, leaked to The Weekend Australian, shows Hydro Tasmania’s power-purchasing agreements for its major Tasmanian wind farms – Musselroe and Woolnorth – will return a $12.5m loss this financial year, rising to $20.6m in 2014-15. Cumulative losses total $103.6m by 2018-19, according to the document, the authenticity of which was confirmed by the company.
Mr Davy blamed the projected losses largely on uncertainty surrounding the RET, being reviewed amid a push from business, industry and elements of the Coalition to reduce or abolish it to cut power prices.
He said the projections were pessimistic and only part of the equation on wind farm profitability, but reflected a significant market decline linked to the pending abolition of the carbon tax and uncertainty on the RET. “Since the time the power purchase agreements were negotiated for these wind farms, there has been significant decline in the market, including the impact of the anticipated removal of a price on carbon,” Mr Davy said. “The market decline has been exacerbated by continued uncertainty about the future of the RET. The ongoing review of the RET has created a lot of uncertainty around wind farm revenues.”
Hydro Tasmania is a major player in renewable energy, particularly through its Chinese wind farm joint venture partners Shenhua Clean Energy.
The Musselroe and Woolnorth wind farms are owned by Woolnorth Wind Farm Holdings, a joint venture between the two companies. The companies have $1.6bn in plans to develop, build and operate a further 700MW of wind farms in Australia by 2020. Separately, Hydro, which exports power to mainland Australia, is investigating a $2bn plan to build the southern hemisphere’s largest wind farm on King Island.
As lobbying intensifies ahead of next week’s closure of submissions for the RET review, Mr Davy said all major expenditure on new wind farms was on hold: “We won’t be able to commit large amounts of money further developing those opportunities until the RET is reaffirmed.”
He warned abolition of the RET would kill off all future wind farm developments.
The Australian
Isn’t it just delicious to hear an accomplished rent seeker – that couldn’t keep the simplest of the promises it made to King Island locals – whining about the Coalition planning to amend (or scrap) the largest (and, hopefully, the last “great”) corporate welfare scheme in the history of the Commonwealth?
The idea that the 41,000 GWh figure set for the large-scale mandatory RET represents some immutable law – or even an implicit promise to maintain that figure – represents wishful thinking at its very best.
The Renewable Energy Act expressly provides for a review of the target to be carried out every 2 years (click here for the relevant section). To believe that the figure – once set – would only ever be maintained or increased – is naive in the extreme – for a company to base its entire business model on it, is just plain stupid.
What is perplexing, though, is how Hydro Tasmania can blame the RET review for losses already incurred? The mandatory RET is, as yet, unchanged, so how can the mere fact of the review (which was only announced in January this year) have caused any booked-losses at all?
STT suspects that Hydro Tasmania has made some “bone-head” plays with its Power Purchase Agreements and/or by banking on a high and rising price for Renewable Energy Certificates.
One likely scenario, is that Hydro Tasmania set a price in its PPAs based on a REC price significantly higher than the prices actually realised (since November last year, RECs have fallen from around $37 to $27 now); or that it has made some bad calls betting in the REC’s futures market. Either way, to blame a regulatory change that hasn’t happened is complete nonsense.
Having said that, Hydro Tasmania is clearly on to something: for wind power companies, the worst is yet to come.
The Treasurer, Joe Hockey sent the wind industry and its parasites into a tailspin after his recent interview with Alan Jones – when he branded wind turbines “a blight on the landscape” and “utterly offensive”. However, it’s what he went on to say about the “age of entitlement” that has wind power investors quaking in their boots (see our posts here and here).
During the interview, Hockey mentioned Coalition plans to scrap the Clean Energy Regulator (CER). Shortly afterwards it was reported from “government sources” that there were no plans to scrap the CER – and that what Joe was referring to was the Coalition’s plan to scrap the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which has been on the cards since well before the election last September.
The media heat generated by Hockey’s interview on Alan Jones has stirred more than just passing interest from other Coalition members – who hitherto have had little knowledge of, or interest in, the cost of the mandatory RET or the workings of the CER.
Dozens of Coalition members are now transfixed by the insane cost of the mandatory RET (and the relevance and cost of the CER) – in much the same way that our attention gets drawn to a car crash – no matter how much twisted metal, blood and gore, we find it next to impossible to look away or move on.
The CER – which purports to administer the mandatory RET – is under the control of Environment Minister, Greg Hunt. Since Hockey’s interview, young Greg has been bombarded by his Coalition colleagues demanding to know why he plans to retain the CER at all.
As to the fate of the mandatory RET, one earlier idea floated internally by the Coalition was that the annual large-scale target would be reduced from 41,000 GWh to something between 23-27,000 GWh. That much reduced target would then be met by simply sweeping up anything that vaguely constituted “renewable energy” that hasn’t previously been counted towards meeting the current target. On that scenario, there will be no need for any further renewable energy capacity.
However, the same growing gang of Coalition members calling on Greg Hunt to axe the CER, are now calling for the mandatory RET to be scrapped outright. STT hears that Hunt was told by one member last week: “what are we doing, let’s just kill it now”. Oh dear!
The wind industry is nothing more than a house of cards: remove the coercion placed on retailers by the mandatory RET to take insanely expensive, intermittent and unreliable wind power and it will all collapse in a heartbeat.
Marilyn has compiled a list of Liberal blunders. Yes! It is a Very….Long….List…..
|
"Mothers Against Wind Turbines™" Phoenix Rising... 